Tagged: history
On Juneteenth’s Despair
Anyone else’s read of the passing scene include that the Juneteenth folks are desperate? They are even more lame than most pastors and evangelists. No matter how ambiguously noble they make their particular “holiday” sound, no matter how much of the population they invite, no matter how family friendly they make it, I will never celebrate Juneteenth.
Why?
Because it is rooted in victimhood.
Lincoln didn’t wait for someone to tell him it was okay to be free. Neither did GW or TJ.
The slaves, however, waited. The enslaved waited. And they always will wait. That’s what makes them slaves. That what allows them to become enslaved.
So “no”, my family and I won’t be celebrating.
Their cause isn’t noble. Their invitation isn’t sincere. And the whole family friendly ploy is a joke. If bounce houses had any value, world peace would have broken out, starting in urban neighborhoods—last generation.
Museum Quality TDS, South Park Quality Indoctrination, and Food—My Trip to Rushmore and Crazy Horse
Anyone who has ever visited a custom framing store knows that the easiest upsell in the universe is museum quality glass. For the uninitiated, the glass companies, or whoever, provide this shadow box which holds an item—usually a yellow tassel—behind what appears to be one half of a pane of glass. That’s the gimmick. It appears like there is no glass on one half. But there is. And now you’re hooked. How could you ever cover any framed object with a dirty window?
Naturally, this museum quality glass gets its name from its use in museums—these carefully curated places of unfiltered history. Or at least that’s how I think of museums. Sure, there are going to be words of explanation besides the clear-glass-encased pieces and sure these words will naturally be written with an agenda of some sort. But the objects behind the unseen glass are the real communicators.
Luckily for us, this is still the case with Mt Rushmore. You see, I just took the kids to visit it—A- had learned about it in kindergarten. And all I can say is I am happy to report the museum piece was worth it. Because the description was sorely lacking.
The video presentation, which spent a lot of time on the importance of the right type of rock for such a project, had a line, “Years later, the artist (I can’t recall his name) was asked if there was enough room for another face and he said, ‘No’.”
TDS has infected a national memorial. Firstly, if Trump wants his face on it, he will get it done—and in gold. Secondly, the Left is somehow afraid of this man. What has he done to them besides disagree and name call? It’s incredible to witness their fear.
Oh, and did you know women and minorities helped create Mt Rushmore?
It is impossible—literally you can see both from the road—to not want to go to check out the Johnny-come-lately Indians’ effort while in the Rushmore area. Of course, I mean Crazy Horse.
Unfortunately, for anyone who has ever seen South Park, the experience is uneasy. Rushmore charges $10 to park. And the entire site is built to last—lots of stone and whatever that fake but permanent wood is called that decks can be built out of. Bathrooms are great. Viewing area is great. The whole experience is great.
But the Crazy Horse experience is embarrassing. They have a fee schedule—to include $10(!) to walk up. And a car load is $35. The entire monument (which will be epic at a LOTR level if they ever get smart and finish it) is very far away. Everything about the place is VHS in a world of 4K streaming—and I mean the kind of chasm involved in visiting your distant relatives whose TV/VCR combo unit isn’t flat, let alone do they have two bathrooms.
We watched a video (as recommended) to continue the post-parking lot experience which began with actually handing a just-received physical ticket to a gatekeeper. The movie was informative, and it contained the key flaw to the concept: the belief in adherence to unduly stubborn principles.
Again, back at Rushmore we were informed us that the artist and his son barely touched the mountain—instead they directed the many workers.
Crazy Horse’s artist was the sole worker, at least to start. And from Rushmore’s crew.
Rushmore took 14 years.
Crazy horse is 78 and no horse in sight.
I understand TTP (Trust the Process) and am living proof that it is true. Also, I cannot stress enough how cool the final monument will be. I am also totally fine with the tragic concept behind the project, that of an Indian pointing to where his home was—even though it necessarily carries the false idea that losers were participants in an unfair fight.
Back to the visit, we next perused what there was to peruse and noticed that in only 8 minutes there would be a proper drum and dance performance.
We took our seats and proceeded to listen to a real (looking) lady Indian dressed in real (looking) Indian gear lecture us for 50 minutes of an hour, on how the 600 tribes of Indians were living in perfect harmony, how they forecast Einstein’s E=mc2, and how the word “Sioux” means “snake”.
It was a family affair, we learned. So her 10 year old daughter came out and sang a short Indian song. And then her 19 year old daughter came out and danced two dances, accompanied by iPhone drums (probably not AI song) over loudspeakers, in a dress strung with hundreds of bell-looking things that sounded like kazoos jingling.
I need to emphasize here: I understand totally the concept of “talk before eat”. It is impossible to serve free food and then ask people to stay for a free lecture. Main attractions have to come last, I get it. But the lecture was 5/6ths of the allocated time and rife with inaccuracies—she even pointed out the brains of buffaloes were used to oil the hides.
(See Wilder’s settler’s written description of “butchering day” for context.)
Anyhow, after driving away, and while tearing down our campsite the next morning (have I mentioned I am an Eagle Scout and quite literally one of the Last Boy Scouts?), it hit me. These people need to, firstly, tell the truth about how tragic and brutal life was before civilization approached and conquered. Secondly, after starting with the depressing, they need to regain some face and their only way to do that is to highlight proudly (and most welcomed-ly) all the ways the Indian ways influenced and sustains the dominant civilization—like, say, Indian Guides, Boy Scouts, chief, army helicopter titles (blackhawk, kiowa etc).
Lastly, the food at Rushmore is exactly what I imagined food in communist countries is like—terrible. But guess what?! The entire restaurant facility is award winning in its “green”-ness. I mean, consider this. The restaurant which serves terrible food (except the ice cream of course) is award winning: “Feel good about how the preparation and housing of the terrible, and overpriced, food adheres to irrelevant, purpose-less government guidelines.”
This brings me to my concluding advice: the food at Crazy Horse smelled really good—even to a full stomach. So don’t let any of my criticism deter you from seeing both monuments. But skip Rushmore’s restaurant and donate your money to the Crazy Horse food crowd instead of the commies.
Finally, two illustrative pics.
A Case Study in Context Clues
My friend thinks I am an asshole for insisting that I gave him all the context he needed to understand this snippet.
Accompanying that image, I sent him:
His response:
It’s all there, I assure you. But let’s break it down.
Nobody says “negro” anymore. My adding this was to more assuredly call attention to the time period, geography, and mood of the snippet.
Montgomery and Negroes and 1956 all call to mind Civil Rights time period and events—and to, say, a person who fancies himself a historian—the bus boycott.
On “her employer”: The established time and place makes it near certain that the employer isn’t a negro and the her is. It is also fine at this point to run with the assumption that the employer is a man.
On “tells her”: This Employer-Boss Man-Mister-Master is telling her-negro-woman something to correct her behavior.
On “Everybody is saying”: classic (and classically faulty) passive and indirect approach to admonition.
On “Communists refuse to ride the bus”: here we have confirmation of bus boycott and Alabama. The use of the C-word in the 50s is meant to be so repulsive that any self-respecting Negro would never group themselves by action with the commies.
On “I know you got them told, Miss Lucy”: We have both (a) confirmation that employee is Negro Woman through “got them told” (read: I know you corrected everybody holding this errant belief) and (b) we found out we were wrong on sex of employer. Miss Lucy clearly indicates a woman. And on the whole, we appreciate the setup for the punchline that the Negro Woman just delivered. Compelling stuff.
On “‘Cause you wouldn’t let no communist raise your six chillun”: This is both (a) more confirmation that a Negro Woman is the her, adding specifics of job requirements, and (b) the punchline. The punchline is that the white employer lady—white employer ladies are supposed to be smart—turns out to be a rather grave hypocrite when the plain facts are recounted. This is because a refusing-bus-Negro-servant, whom everybody thinks must needs be communist, cannot possibly be communist, because if she was a commie, then it would mean employer-white-lady-boss would be raising communist children. An thar aint no way in hayell Klan members is commies.
****
As usual, “What is right is not always popular; what is popular is not always right.” Or as Mark Twain puts it, “Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reconsider.”
So I say again, “Yay truth!”
Thuck-Y-Dideez
I first heard of Thucydides in college. This would have been 2001-ish. We weren’t studying him, but the professor needed to make a point and used the classic “Athens-open, Sparta-closed” historian to do so. Along the way, the professor interlaced a story about how a student came to him complaining about the reading and pronounced thoo-sih-di-deez: Thuck-Y-Dideez.
Funny stuff.
I do not know what the Thucydides Trap is, but I want to post an informed guess before I google it. What did Xi mean when he used the phrase?
Before I reveal my surmise, I want to add here that a chinaman using a western anecdote is real evidence that America and the West are already winning the war with China. And rightly so, since we’re obviously the more relevant civilization.
Okay. That said. What is the “Thucydides Trap” that we hope to avoid?
War.
(Wish me luck in my AI-ing for confirmation/information.)
GW Quote From Which To Draw Motivation
Reading Log 2.6.2026
The reason Aristotle should be read and will be rewarding is simple enjoyment of compare/contrast of methods. He also forces you to abandon juhhhhst about every preconception about government and politics you currently hold.
****
GW never disappoints. What a life. I confess that sometimes my mind wanders as the descriptions of all the various messages being sent to and between all the many forts and camps are given. At the same time, what an exciting job, no? Perfect for a young man wishing to prove his worth, I say. What task of today compares with, “Your countryman’s lives depend on you successfully carrying this message through the forest undetected. Can you do it?”?
****
After I discovered Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla, after I found a portrait, and after I framed it behind museum quality glass and hung it on my wall, I realized that I didn’t really know much about him or his role in Mexico’s independence. There’s a brief entry in my 1910 Britannica set. And then there’s this book. Suffice it to say, now I do. In short, and probably fortunately, the word “legend” has to be applied. New Spain and the caste system it operated within simply didn’t have an established habit of written record. Another difficulty that can really only be appreciated if you read GW and Hidalgo simultaneously, is the scale of the geography upon which events unfolded. New Spain (future Mexico) was enormous, whereas GW was focused on New York and Long Island and a few other relatively minuscule locations along the Atlantic coast. In the end, however, for both legendary and historically verifiable reasons, Hidalgo does belong among the six men on my wall. Oh, and you’ll never guess the nickname he got after college. So go! Read and learn! (Even the internet won’t help you.)
****
How could I, American hero that I am, not like Alien vs Captain America? Just look at those covers. Rest assured, they do not disappoint.
****
Isaac Newton leads the way for humans—overall. But Aquinas leads the way for methodical writing. This man’s rigid adherence to a method is otherworldly. I won’t say it is commendable, because I am too interested in creative writing. But when I hear people talk and it is utter unfocused confusion, the easy fix is to show them Aquinas.
****
I knew Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea. (Read it too.) I did not know about The Mysterious Island. It is fun. A few chapters in and I found myself thinking, “Wait a minute! This is just a genre-establishing sci-fi version of Robinson Crusoe and Swiss Family Robinson.” Then it seemed like it was literally in the next chapter’s opening that Verne, or the narrator, detailed as much and offered a decide-for-yourself-whether-it’s-a meaningful distinction. In any case, compelling start, second act slowed a bit, but the third finished strong. It isn’t a must read. But if you have interest, it won’t disappoint.
What Fascism Looks Like When Carried Out By Mankind
Faithful readers and new readers alike: The point of sharing lists of how many deportations past presidents and administrations carried out is not the illustration that both political parties have done what Trump is doing. Neither are the lists particularly indicative of the character of past politicians. In other words, it isn’t news that politicians change their policies or blatantly lie at times.
The point of the lists is to definitively give absolutely conclusive and damning evidence that Trump and his administration are not behaving like fascists while they enforce the nation’s—every nation’s—established Laws.
For a glimpse of fascism, read this blurb from back in October of 1938. Pay careful attention to the twin facts regarding there being (a) a new agreement and (b) no protection.
To be sure: Trump et al are not enforcing some new law. And there is no law (being enforced or left unenforced) in which protection is withheld or unconsidered.
Current events across the land are not evidence of fascism. Not even close.
They Do Not Conceal Like I Would
It is surprising to me, and seems to surprise most of us, that the bad guys self-identify so strongly.
I am currently reading GW’s biography. There have been parallels to today which are difficult to ignore, even as they aren’t 1:1. For example, I have to admit that had I been British back then, I would probably have been surprised that the colonists were so blatantly identifying as enemies. I would have thought, “Don’t they understand who they are up against? Maintaining neutrality, even as a feint, seems the stronger play.”
But no. When a fight is brewing, the two sides declare themselves.
I think the matter can be put plainly: When you’re on the side of those with the guns, it is surprising that the people without the guns would fight you—but it shouldn’t be.
These contemporary secessionists in Portland, Minnesota, and elsewhere have not yet declared independence. I would say, on most levels, they are miles away from being organized in any sense like those who declared independence back on July 4, 1776. But I will not be teaching my kids that it is surprising that stupid people unabashedly announce the side they’re on.
One Macro-Scale Reason Charlie Kirk Was Killed
Check this paragraph out. It is from Robert Shaplen’s New Yorker article “Life in Saigon: Spring 1972 We Have Always Survived”, April 15, 1972.
There is no need to complete the paragraph. You get the point.
This was 1972. This was the behavior of the “good guys”. This was conducted in essentially a third world, war torn country, without computers.
I don’t know about you, but I am astounded by the (new to me) information therein.
So I want to ask you: What do you want, my fellow Americans? Do you want to continue to feign outrage at the Left and its lunatic adherents and make wild claims about a coming civil war? Do you want to teach each other that there must be a response, even if it is simply at the polls? Do you want to appear totally shocked by the fact that someone who wasn’t a threat to anyone was assassinated? Do you want to task Tan’s special police to find the next lunatics?
What do you want?
I’ll tell you what I want. I want to be left alone. I want to have a private life. I want my thoughts about, my opinions about, and mostly my actions while living life on this third rock from the materials fusion process we call “the sun” to be officially unknown to any government entity.
Will you give me what I want?
Because of my desire for privacy, I am not particularly concerned about the Left and their lunatic adherents. Because of my desire for privacy, I am not particularly interested in pontificating about the meaning of assassinations. And I am not particularly surprised that harmless people are murdered.
In place of these concerns, I am particularly concerned that my kids grow up understanding that while there might be a way of life which tries to prevent assassinations (or keep the peace in general), that way will never be the way to live life. Practically, then, this means that I spend time preparing to teach them the history of the Vietnam War. Will you join me?
The Answer to, “What ‘Gender’ means?” A Question Posed by My PhD Candidate Friend
For posterity.
I have to tell a story because I cannot see how the plain didactic situation will help given that you haven’t seen it yet.
I had a friend who was a math professor and he was adamant about Free Market economics. Once he gave me a link to his “behind paywall”guru—a link to one of those YouTube clips that can only be viewed if you have the link, which follows the overall belief he held that humans should pay for valuable things/ideas.
In the clip, the guru/astrophysicist-teacher-dude said, “Every word should have one and only one meaning.” That caught my attention because it is so asinine. The idea that words should be like numbers or math symbols is just ludicrous. To set that as a goal is ludicrous. Immediately questions like, “Which language would these ‘one meaning only’ words be in?” came to mind.
With me?
This relates to gender because language is where gender starts. There are languages (Hebrew and Greek among myriad others) which, when spoken, seem to add or subtract little suffix sounds (like ee or ish) to what we would call pretty much any non-verbs—so nouns, adjectives, prepositions etc. If I were to do this in English, it might sound like, “Hey, Matt! Throw her the ball-ee. And then, Jill, throw Matt the ball. Then, Matt, when you get the ball back, see those girls over there? Throw the ball-ee–ish to them.” (In this example, ee is female and ish is plural).
Why did these sounds develop? Who knows.
But anyone, including you, who would have been looking at or listening to the language(s) would be inclined to recognize (or be taught) that the “ball” part of the sound is the same concrete item and word, but the suffix sound (or lack thereof) changes depending on whether a female is involved.
The catch, of course, is that the method isn’t 1-to-1; in other words, there are exceptions to the rule. But the rule still comes to our minds. So words (aloud and written—many of earliest languages were merely copying the sounds, no such thing as proper spelling existed) became known as the idea…drumroll…GENDER!!
What should humans have done? Is the idea/object behind the word “ball” and “ball-ee” the same thing? Or not? I suppose you could argue that they are two different things. But that seems overly complex. In the end, there is one ball. But for some reason, when it is thrown to a human with boobs and a va-jay-jay, it is called “ball-ee” (in my example).
Next, fast forward through history until the last century and (I am very earnest and serious here; I have come across other folks who admit the following too) we come to the point where this concept of math symbols (think x and y and π), with their one and only one meaning, are thought of as superior to all the often unclear complications of ordinary language. In short, instead of written language copying sounds, people wanted language to represent ideas and with exactness.
HERE IS THE JUMP/CONNECTION: One day someone suggests the idea that biological sex (penis vs vagina) is irrelevant. But they immediately confuse everyone listening because the honest response is, “How can I not be a woman/man?” So these people borrow the grammar category (abstract label) “gender” and apply it to their (NEW) idea. (The idea being that the concrete reality of your biological sex is ultimately irrelevant.)
I offer for your consideration, that even you, friend, must be able to use the word gender when you communicate, both to show you understand grammar, AND to show you understand what time you are living in. There is an idea, however incorrect, called gender now. This is no different than, say, how the ideas psychology and communism are relatively new to the passing scene.
Put in dictionary style, gender (in the context of “ethnicity, class, and gender”) is the IDEA that biological sex is ultimately irrelevant.
Captain’s Log 